I just got here on these forums because I wanted to become more knowledgeable about network security (euphemism alert) and similar topics, but I get distracted easily and end up moving naturally to the more political discussions.

I have read through a lot of post in the political section and I keep seeing a recurring theme that is enormously grounded in certainty. That is the fact that evil is a natural human characteristic. I would not argue against the many examples that show this, I have only this to ask at the moment: If evil and wrongdoing was as hard-wired as you claim it is in people, then why is it considered evil? Doesn't the nature of evil require that it be rooted in the minority?

(I know mod senses are tingling about this being mis-categorized, so I'll bring it home with a political example to keep this discussion from being too much about nothing)

Communism! No more evil words have ever been spoken in America. Such a misguided idea, but why? The assumption I keep seeing is that there is only one kind of communism, that being state socialism. There is another assumption, that being the opposite and better version of socialism is democracy, but democracy and socialism are describing two different systems. Democracy is majority rule. Socialism is an economic system where all people, not just a select few, control the means of production and gain from the profits on a democratically decided system. (What the hell is your point man! I know, I'm getting there soon, just bear with me.)

America does not have a true democratic system. If we did, we would vote on all issues rather than just for people. That is your reason for the world moving in the wrong direction. The power is in the hands of the few, the evil, the minority. These few people can be bought and sold, but nobody has the resources to buy off a ruling majority (at least not for an extended period).

Those few people controlling everything depend on us feeling contempt for others and their ways. We should stop and ask ourselves "Am I evil? Are my family and friends evil?" Though everyone would answer differently, I think the overwhelming majority would say no. The people in power wouldn't stand a chance against an empowered population.

America has a republic. The people have very little say in the political decisions that are made. But, the people have a say of who makes those decisions.

Evil is only defined in your prospective. Example:

Middle eastern terrorists(bare with me). America sees these "terrorists" as evil and want to destroy them. From America's point of view they are evil.

From the Middle eastern's people view, these "terrorists" are considered freedom fighters, saviors.

My point is, evil is simply a point of view/prospective that was negatively effected by any action(that is how I see it, you don't have to agree with me).

Back to the political discussion, if humans didn't have this "evil" ambition, America wouldn't have a huge economy. Actually, who knows that Europeans would've came to America? This "evil" gives humans a sense of ambition to better their conditions, or if they are in a powerful political role, it ["evil"] gives them ambition to stay in that role.

As for the political systems; democracy has its flaws, communism certainly has its flaws, fascism has its flaws, the current US system (a mix between every possible system, or thats how I see it as) certainly has its flaws. The problem is that, every system will be in violation of its people's rights. There is no system where everyone has the maximum amount of rights and everyone is satisfied with the wealth they have. It seems that humans have so much "evil" ambition, that they work so hard to gain more wealth or better circumstances that without this "evil" ambition, human society would be no where near what it has come to now. Humans may still be living as "cavemen". Who knows?

that's not necessarily true. name one presidential election in the 20th century that it was possible for a third party candidate to win. the media just wouldn't allow it.

Evil is only defined in your prospective.

though, i agree with you on that, i didn't mean to make it sound like i was trying to argue some metaphysical idea. i was only trying to argue that the bad feelings people feel towards the population as a whole ought to be directed to where the actual direction of human history comes from, the established order and the authoritarians who run it.

Back to the political discussion, if humans didn't have this "evil" ambition, America wouldn't have a huge economy. Actually, who knows that Europeans would've came to America? This "evil" gives humans a sense of ambition to better their conditions, or if they are in a powerful political role, it ["evil"] gives them ambition to stay in that role.

As for the political systems; democracy has its flaws, communism certainly has its flaws, fascism has its flaws, the current US system (a mix between every possible system, or thats how I see it as) certainly has its flaws. The problem is that, every system will be in violation of its people's rights. There is no system where everyone has the maximum amount of rights and everyone is satisfied with the wealth they have. It seems that humans have so much "evil" ambition, that they work so hard to gain more wealth or better circumstances that without this "evil" ambition, human society would be no where near what it has come to now. Humans may still be living as "cavemen". Who knows?

I hope that I gave you what you were looking for in a response

i don't think that evil is the word you are looking for when describing people as a whole. if there is one negative aspect of the population, it is apathy. most people are just trying to survive and help their family survive. it's a minority that direct policy, whether or not it is good or bad. all i'm arguing is that people are smart enough to govern themselves and we don't need self appointed betters. every system has it's flaws, but it's about moving in the direction that the people choose, not just the few in power.

that's not necessarily true. name one presidential election in the 20th century that it was possible for a third party candidate to win. the media just wouldn't allow it.

Very true statement, but the media is part of the people; they have a say in the process too. Although their say wasn't meant to be as big as it is now(I mean in respect to the Constitution only. Who knows if some other party or group wanted them to have such a big influence over the American people.).

though, i agree with you on that, i didn't mean to make it sound like i was trying to argue some metaphysical idea. i was only trying to argue that the bad feelings people feel towards the population as a whole ought to be directed to where the actual direction of human history comes from, the established order and the authoritarians who run it.

if there is one negative aspect of the population, it is apathy.

There is the answer to your own question. I agree with you. Apathy (in our case) can be described as "evil" in our society. It has caused the US political and economic system to blend and fall apart. If people actually cared about politics there would be so many violations of the bill of rights?(I could go on and on) You shot it right in the head. The US would be an amazing place to live if people actually cared. Regardless of what bullshit the media tells them.

As for your democracy argument, the media (or some other massive monopoly) would have the same exact effect in a pure democracy. People(the majority) would be apathetic for 90% of the issues at hand and want someone to make those decisions for them. Hence the political vacuum. As humans we need some kind of leader or leadership. The pure democracy would ask for someone to take control and the majority would be apathetic to the rise of power.